I was always curios is there some beta webosdoctors or beta packages that could be released and at least used via meta-doctor? Its really strange that company like HP which leaks from all sides can hold beta stuff this close to their chests. Almost any other company except Apple got leaked firmwares. Now, when they sold webOS to the LG and all warranties get expired, I really can't see reason not to open access to beta stuff.

I can't imagine HP shipped out all its' Engineers. I know the Gram people are gone, but if I recall right, they still were looking for hardware specific people. For that matter, who's doing the current Android model? And what about the Windows OS related folks? Granted, they can't work on a dual-boot configuration - as per MS rules - but at some point they could leave that MS-DOS Windows configuration, and move on to a new OS.

Why couldn't new Engineers be hired? HP may have burned bridges, but at some point, they will need to make a heavier investment in hardware R&D.

For HP right now, the diificult financial investments (as well as the related fraud issues), need time to be a part of history. Until that smoke clears, HP is reluctant to make bold moves. As we all know, a new set of webOS tablet/phones by HP would definitely be a bold move.

I can't imagine HP shipped out all its' Engineers. I know the Gram people are gone, but if I recall right, they still were looking for hardware specific people. For that matter, who's doing the current Android model? And what about the Windows OS related folks? Granted, they can't work on a dual-boot configuration - as per MS rules - but at some point they could leave that MS-DOS Windows configuration, and move on to a new OS.

Why couldn't new Engineers be hired? HP may have burned bridges, but at some point, they will need to make a heavier investment in hardware R&D.

For HP right now, the diificult financial investments (as well as the related fraud issues), need time to be a part of history. Until that smoke clears, HP is reluctant to make bold moves. As we all know, a new set of webOS tablet/phones by HP would definitely be a bold move.

.

Any bold move would require you OWN the source code outright, OWN the trademark outright --- and able to control your own destiny.

The whole point is that HP licensed the code to someone (LG) who thought they could make webOS devices profitably. HP doesn't believe it can and wants to be in services and software anyway so it will support webOS as it fits into the areas it which it wants to expand.

The fact that LG struck a paid licensing deal with the old code, meaning the open source efforts were not sufficient for LG to make the webOS tv that they envisioned, suggests to me that we will not see the old code leaked to the public. At least not from HP or LG.

The best we can hope for is that LG continues to be enthusiastic about the tv and the tv takes off, giving rise to the possibility that other devices, including mobile phones and tablets, will be on the LG drawing board. The app catalogue issue would need to be solved for the latter or the web advanced enough so that web apps run well.
Additionally, an upset in the android world (ie google debuting exclusive motorola phone models) would help as a catalyst.

The fact that LG struck a paid licensing deal with the old code, meaning the open source efforts were not sufficient for LG to make the webOS tv that they envisioned, suggests to me that we will not see the old code leaked to the public. At least not from HP or LG.

The ONLY way to control the open webOS is to control the proprietary source code of webOS. LG can distribute webos under dual licenses --- one proprietary and the second open source (like MySQL).

The ONLY way to control the open webOS is to control the proprietary source code of webOS. LG can distribute webos under dual licenses --- one proprietary and the second open source (like MySQL).

That's not true, although they do have the parts of webos that have not been made open source, even if all they had was the open source parts, they could do like you said -- identical versions with different licenses, or they could create their own dev tree and license that separately from the open source parts.

I think LG is excited to come to the open source world, with a product that is already open, and become the guiding force behind it. I know many that have come to work with webos because webos is built with a lot of open source software, and individually the vast majority of us absolutely believe in open. We understand that in time, there will be big benefits, and if you look closely at the open webos repos you can see that a lot of progress has been made in the system upgrades.

Didn't HP just sell WebOS? How could they continue to make something they don't own?

As I understand it they still have a license to use WebOS and all the patents for that matter, then there is OpenWebOS which anyone is free to use if they like. So, yes, they could. But they won't, it is far more likely that LG might one day, or some 3rd party using OpenWebOS for that matter.

It sounds to me like LG were working on the SmartTV stuff and wanted to take the engineers in-house, this deal gives them that and ownership of the code and license to use the patents. All of which makes things much simpler for them and means they don't even have to switch to OpenWebOS if they don't want to, they can keep things proprietary and closed if they like. They also get custodianship of OpenWebOS though so my guess is they will stay pretty open.

That's not true, although they do have the parts of webos that have not been made open source, even if all they had was the open source parts, they could do like you said -- identical versions with different licenses, or they could create their own dev tree and license that separately from the open source parts.

If LG doesn't own the proprietary part of webos including the webos trademark --- then LG has to fork open webos into a different project under a different brand name.

All I am saying when I replied to bluenote is that there are many benefits of owning the proprietary source code and the proprietary trademark of webOS --- in terms of controlling the open webOS project. Bluenote's position about LG taking the proprietary webos source code because LG doesn't care about the open webos project is flawed.

I can't imagine HP shipped out all its' Engineers. I know the Gram people are gone, but if I recall right, they still were looking for hardware specific people. For that matter, who's doing the current Android model? And what about the Windows OS related folks? Granted, they can't work on a dual-boot configuration - as per MS rules - but at some point they could leave that MS-DOS Windows configuration, and move on to a new OS.

Why couldn't new Engineers be hired? HP may have burned bridges, but at some point, they will need to make a heavier investment in hardware R&D.

For HP right now, the diificult financial investments (as well as the related fraud issues), need time to be a part of history. Until that smoke clears, HP is reluctant to make bold moves. As we all know, a new set of webOS tablet/phones by HP would definitely be a bold move.

.

The "Gram" people are NOT gone from HP. Some of them are... I am 100% sure HP engineers and developers for webOS still exist today. LG buying webOS from HP is NOT synonymous with LG taking webOS from HP. As many have pointed out -- its a licensing deal with A team of webOS staff thrown in for good measure. People misinterpret that move by HP (moving staff to LG) as evidence of wanting to disown it. Not true. The team not only ensures that LG (their first major customer) has the most chance of success with webOS, but it also provides LG with capability to further develop webOS for themselves. It's a smart business move, IMHO.

The "Gram" people are NOT gone from HP. Some of them are... I am 100% sure HP engineers and developers for webOS still exist today. LG buying webOS from HP is NOT synonymous with LG taking webOS from HP. As many have pointed out -- its a licensing deal with A team of webOS staff thrown in for good measure. People misinterpret that move by HP (moving staff to LG) as evidence of wanting to disown it. Not true. The team not only ensures that LG (their first major customer) has the most chance of success with webOS, but it also provides LG with capability to further develop webOS for themselves. It's a smart business move, IMHO.

(1) It is NOT a licensing deal --- LG bought the source code out right.
(2) And we don't know what LG is up to --- Palm bought BeOS source code out right but did nothing to it because all Palm wanted was the engineers. LG bought the BeOS UI engineers --- much like RIM bought The Astonishing Tribe UI engineers.
(3) Even if there are still HP Gram people, chances are that they will be reassigned to some other department.

(1) It is NOT a licensing deal --- LG bought the source code out right.
(2) And we don't know what LG is up to --- Palm bought BeOS source code out right but did nothing to it because all Palm wanted was the engineers. LG bought the BeOS UI engineers --- much like RIM bought The Astonishing Tribe UI engineers.
(3) Even if there are still HP Gram people, chances are that they will be reassigned to some other department.

I don't particularly like to spend ALOT of cycles debating with people... but in this case, you are spewing speculative FUD that is negatively impacting webOS and the people behind it and its way off (so I feel obligated to respond). As many have stated before -- webOS is definitely down -- I am not trying to dilute that reality. I'm just saying HP is working hard behind the scenes to get webOS back to some place useful (and is not done yet) and LG is now a collaborator to that effort (not the new owner).

Instead of reading US Today, NY Times, or whatever news source you are getting your speculation, just read this (straight from HP) and perhaps you will agree with what I'm trying to say -- unless the armor around your heart (I call it cynicism) is just too hard to penetrate.